Sometimes I try to think about the big problems, and look for ways that future technology can help.

One intractable problem in the middle east is two, three, or more religions laying claim to the same dirt. Mecca, Jerusalem, and other religiously significant cities are not shared well.

Today's outside the box idea is some variant on virtual or augmented reality where members of different religions see different street views, based on their personal religious orientation, while visiting the same physical locations.

Of course this is a wild hypothetical, today we could barely afford polarized glasses to allow billboards to deliver different messages to different viewers, but just imagine the possibilities. Important religious sites could be shared by all, peacefully (at least in my rose colored crystal ball).

Interesting idea! The shared-yet-discrete space is not entirely dissimilar to the setup of a book I just finished - ‘The City And The City’ by China Mieville - in which a quirk of history means that two distinct cities share the same geographical space, with that same history meaning that the inhabitants of each city completely ignore (“unsee”) the other city and its people / buildings / cars etc. Great setting for a crime thriller.

Back on topic, if augmented reality and wearable computing do take off in future then I can well imagine parallel versions of reality being a part of how some choose to see the world, to address some of these major social issues - if social policy / diplomacy don’t step up in the meantime...

I just watched "Anon", a Sky original film. It was set in the near future where everyone is wired into the net and their timeline is recorded. As you walk down the street, everything you look at is automatically tagged in your vision. It is only a simple step to tailor what you see to your personal preferences like religion.

In this particular future, crime is impossible because the police can see exactly what happened from anyone's point of view - until a hacker comes along who can erase all evidence of her presence.

The caste system in India is exactly about this - it ensures that several different cultures can co-exist occupying the same space at the same time, fully and forever ignoring each other.

This is why India is possible at all, and why you only see tendencies of civil war when people flee the caste system for alternative religions. People who complain about the systems built-in unfairness simply don't get the implications...

So the deal with Pakistan and the stuff about Kashmir is attributed to something other than their particular belief system? I would like to understand where the intolerance for peacefully living together is stemming from in some areas. I know there are many different religions around my area and there doesn't seem to be an issue .

India is the largest democracy in the world but long threatened by Pakistan and vice versa. Kashmir is a disputed border region between the two nations. Both India and Pakistan developed nuclear weapons, presumably pointed at each other. There has been some easing fo relations between them over recent decades, a form of cricket diplomacy occurred as both countries take cricket seriously. So a cricket match where they don't kill each other is progress.

@ Jakob- that is an interesting (positive?) observation about the caste system, while it has many detractors. India is a mashup of multiple different cultures that coexist, but not without some rough edges and tension between fractions spread across the huge and very populous democracy.

Love China Melville and "City in the City" was great. Anon was also cool. Once our neural implants are in we will be able to communicate like the dolphins or whales. I would like to believe it would make relationships between cultures better but my misanthropic pessimism says it won't change a thing. Just make it weirder.

I find attacking President Trump's family in bad taste, but typical of what passes for modern political mud flinging. Clearly not in the spirit of this topic to explore peaceful ways for disparate groups to live together. I always thought family was off supposed to be limits for dirty politics but she is indeed a high profile celebrity injected into the news cycle and fair game for those inclined to fling political poo.

@ desol perhaps you wish to expand upon what you mean by "turning a blind eye to 'this' bad science fiction concept". Are you referring to "my" bad science fiction concept, or something else? If you would like I can create a new thread to discuss the Palestinian's desire to share, and move your posts into it. I may need to move tand's posts back into the Trump thread so I can ignore him more easily.

The reference to the caste system while pretty obscure kind of makes sense. I doubt Jacob is endorsing the caste system without reservation but instead attempted to explain the larger implications of how it affects different groups coexisting together in a densely populated nation. Of course he can speak for himself, but IMO does not deserve having his comments mischaracterized.

The off topic drive-by political blather, just encourages more in kind... Perhaps we can try to keep the political blather in political discussion threads.

Thank you again for the few on topic and thoughtful responses.

JR

PS: It looks like this thread has become the new political trash bin... time for some housekeeping.

No, I don't need a thread on it. I just noticed comment that was in your original post about sharing in terms of Jerusalem. From my point view, the Israeli's are completely disinterested in sharing. This seem obvious.

No, I don't need a thread on it. I just noticed comment that was in your original post about sharing in terms of Jerusalem. From my point view, the Israeli's are completely disinterested in sharing. This seem obvious.

I don't think your idea would be accepted very well, I'm afraid.

My idea was a hypothetical, not an invitation to reopen old arguments.

The technology for my concept does not exist or if it does, not cost effectively.

My idea was a hypothetical, not an invitation to reopen old arguments.

I don't try to approach them as arguments ultimately, more so as just observations. Just that, I thought that the term sharing was a bit inaccurate, given the nature of what is currently taking place. This idea, which is nice, may be accepted if sharing were the actual objective. In time I think it is inevitable.

I don't try to approach them as arguments ultimately, more so as just observations. Just that, I thought that the term sharing was a bit inaccurate, given the nature of what is currently taking place. This idea, which is nice, may be accepted if sharing were the actual objective. In time I think it is inevitable.

How could I be inaccurate in suggesting a possible fictional concept?

The current conflict is here now reality and the reason for thinking about remedies, while I concede my hypothetical is not practical now, if ever.

“Today's outside the box idea is some variant on virtual or augmented reality where members of different religions see different street views, based on their personal religious orientation, while visiting the same physical locations.”This sounds like a software solution for a hardware problem. My ideas don’t agree with your point of view, just alter your virtual reality.This thread is an example, a post does not share your view, just move it to another thread. I get the reference to the movie “They Live” where polarized glasses allow the wearer to see the reality. Also makes me think of The Matrix.I would hope the human race is capable of evolving socially rather than devolving requiring technical assistance just to exist in harmony.Who controls what is percieved? The politicians don’t have any trouble seeing their own reality, do we want to see what they want us to see? How about big business in control, you only see product choices from xyz corp when you go shopping? Special interest groups, you will see no brown people if you buy into this subdivision or city? Certainly not the military contractors, Imagine if the “Enemy” saw a barren wasteland, or inferno and had no desire for confrontation? There are times that I feel I’m better off invisible, just keep your mouth shut and your head down. Ultimately not a great existence. The Emperor Wears No Clothes comes to mind.

“Today's outside the box idea is some variant on virtual or augmented reality where members of different religions see different street views, based on their personal religious orientation, while visiting the same physical locations.”This sounds like a software solution for a hardware problem. My ideas don’t agree with your point of view, just alter your virtual reality.This thread is an example, a post does not share your view, just move it to another thread. I get the reference to the movie “They Live” where polarized glasses allow the wearer to see the reality. Also makes me think of The Matrix.I would hope the human race is capable of evolving socially rather than devolving requiring technical assistance just to exist in harmony.Who controls what is percieved? The politicians don’t have any trouble seeing their own reality, do we want to see what they want us to see? How about big business in control, you only see product choices from xyz corp when you go shopping? Special interest groups, you will see no brown people if you buy into this subdivision or city? Certainly not the military contractors, Imagine if the “Enemy” saw a barren wasteland, or inferno and had no desire for confrontation? There are times that I feel I’m better off invisible, just keep your mouth shut and your head down. Ultimately not a great existence. The Emperor Wears No Clothes comes to mind.